How to avoid creating linking table using #ElementCollection? - java

I have two entities - Person and Car. Instead of mapping them with #OneToMany relationship, I decided to use #ElementCollection (storing car ids only), so that I could have less load on my DB, additionaly fetching cars whenever I fetch Person.
But Hibernate keeps creating new linking table like 'person_car_ids'. So my question is - how do I map Person id in 'car' table?
#Entity
public class Person implements Serializable {
#Id
private String id;
#ElementCollection
private Set<Long> carIds = new HashSet<>();

From the JPA Wiki:
An ElementCollection can be used to define a one-to-many relationship to an Embeddable object, or a Basic value (such as a collection of Strings). [...] The ElementCollection values are always stored in a separate table.
It doesn't say anywhere that it won't use a different table to store your basic values, just makes it more convenient without having to use a wrapper.
To your question:
I decided to use #ElementCollection (storing car ids only), so that I could have less load on my DB, additionaly fetching cars whenever I fetch Person.
Not sure I got it right, but if you want to fetch cars only when you need them instead of loading them when you fetch a person entity, you can use Lazy loading, which is the default when you use OneToMany annotation.

Related

Difference between #OneToMany and #ElementCollection?

What is the difference between using a #OneToMany and #ElementCollection annotation since both work on the one-to-many relationship?
ElementCollection is a standard JPA annotation, which is now preferred over the proprietary Hibernate annotation CollectionOfElements.
It means that the collection is not a collection of entities, but a collection of simple types (Strings, etc.) or a collection of embeddable elements (class annotated with #Embeddable).
It also means that the elements are completely owned by the containing entities: they're modified when the entity is modified, deleted when the entity is deleted, etc. They can't have their own lifecycle.
I believe #ElementCollection is mainly for mapping non-entities (embeddable or basic) while #OneToMany is used to map entities. So which one to use depend on what you want to achieve.
#ElementCollection allows you to simplify code when you want to implement one-to-many relationship with simple or embedded type. For instance in JPA 1.0 when you wanted to have a one-to-many relationship to a list of Strings, you had to create a simple entity POJO (StringWrapper) containing only primary key and the String in question:
#OneToMany
private Collection<StringWrapper> strings;
//...
public class StringWrapper {
#Id
private int id;
private String string;
}
With JPA 2.0 you can simply write:
#ElementCollection
private Collection<String> strings;
Simpler, isn't it? Note that you can still control the table and column names using #CollectionTable annotation.
See also:
Java Persistence/ElementCollection
Basic or Embedded: #ElementCollection
Entities: #OneToMany or #ManyToMany
#ElementCollection:
the relation is managed (only) by the entity in which the relation is defined
table contains id reference to the owning entity plus basic or embedded attributes
#OneToMany / #ManyToMany:
can also be managed by the other entity
join table or column(s) typically contains id references only
#ElementCollection marks a collection. This does not necessarily mean that this collection references a 1-n join.
ElementCollection can override the mappings, or table for their collection, so you can have multiple entities reference the same Embeddable class, but have each store their dependent objects in a separate table.
#ElementCollection
This annotation will be applied when there is a relation with non-entity and these associations relation was HAS-A. Every collection is created with a table and gets relation by Foreign Key.
There are two types of element collections
Index (List, Map)
Non-Index (Set)
Index: The index type collection has a table with 3 columns they are
Key Column (Foriegn Key)
Index Column (Position of data in collection)
Element Column (Data)
Non-Index: The Non-Index type collection has a table with 2 columns they are
Key Column
Element Column
Note: Here it won't have any index column because, Since a SET doesn’t retain the insertion order.
Multiplicity
This is a way to implement the HAS-A relation between two entities and the cardinality ratio depends on their relation.
You can use ElementCollection replace for you use #OneToMany. Example you can have one Project in many versions.
#ElementCollection
#CollectionTable(name="versions",
joinColumns = #JoinColumn(name="projectID"))
#LazyCollection(LazyCollectionOption.FALSE)
#JoinColumn(name="version",nullable = false)
private Set<String> versions;
You also can use #ElementCollection in mapping OGM for array in one collection.
#ElementCollection(fetch = FetchType.EAGER)
private Set<String> researchAreas;

Filter JPA Entities without removing them from database

i have a database table "viewmodule" with a FK to itself (parent_id) to allow recursive structures.
CREATE TABLE viewmodule (
id,
type,
parent_id,
hide);
My Java application uses JPA/Hibernate to map the entities on that table. We have fixed entity hirachy which is solved by a #Discriminator annotation that uses the "type" column of the table.
public class ViewModule implements Serializable {
private long id;
private String type;
private ViewModule parent;
private Boolean hide;
#OneToMany( targetEntity = ViewModule.class, cascade = javax.persistence.CascadeType.ALL, mappedBy = "parent" )
#Cascade( { org.hibernate.annotations.CascadeType.ALL,
org.hibernate.annotations.CascadeType.DELETE_ORPHAN } )
private Set<ViewModules> children;
(...)
}
My task is now to load all elements from this table (in deep) but left out the ones which have the field "hide" set to true.
Its a apparently simple filter mechanism. My first approach was to use the Hibernate Filter annotation, which works well on the first layer (all viewmodules with parent_id = null). But the filter does not work on the "children" relation. (In my real life model, i have an inheritance structure for the different types of the ViewModules)
Therefore i've written a small function that recursively walks through the viewModule object tree and removes the viewModules from the children relation that have hide=true;
But, as all objects are still under observation of the jpa/hibernate entityManager, every remove from a collection is directly executed as delete in the database. So my filter function removes the entity from the database, and that is a bad thing.
I tried to use the "evict" method from the hibernate session to detach the entities before filtering but that leads to a LazyInitialisationException.
So, to prevent cloning all of my object my question is how to solve this problem? Is there a way to detach the object in way that all collections are initialized? Or is there a special Kung-Fu Chuck-Norris JPA Annotation that can filter the collections?
Thanks in advance
use native query
em.createNativeQuery("select * from viewmodule where hide = false", ViewModule.class).getResultList();
This works: Filter list contained in entity returned by jpa/hibernate query
Make a new collection and add only the elements that have hide=false. You won't be able to distribute that collection together with the object, so you'd have to return it from a separate method call. For example: dao.getVisibleItems(module)
Another thing - you can remove the Cascade.DELETE (i.e. list all cascades except delete) and the orphan removal, if you don't need them.

Many to Many Mapping in Hibernate without Collection

Given a classic example of Student and Subject
where they have a many-to-many relationship,
is there any way to map them using POJOs w/o the use of Collections?
e.g.
Student.java
#Entity
class Student{
#id
int id;
String name;
}
Subject.java
#Entity
class Subject{
#id
int id;
String desc;
}
Tables
student (id,name)
subject (id,desc)
student_subject (student_id, subject_id) /* both foreign keys */
How will you query all subjects of a student?
Is it possible to generate these tables with the given beans?
Thanks in advance!
UPDATE: (I'll just give a background why I ask this ?)
My reason for avoiding Collections is that I would like my Service Layer to return data that is not tied to the Persistence Layer. Returning a Student object that has a list of Subjects will make my Service Layer Clients assume that they can get the subjects from the returned student object (then they'll get a LazyLoadException). If I make it EAGER loading, it would be overkill, since in many situations the client would only like the info about the Student and not get all his subjects.
To get all subjects, you need to join the tables like so:
select *
from subject
join student_subject
on subject.id = student_subject.subject_id
where
student_subject.student_id = ?
Is it possible to generate these tables with the given beans?
If you use the many-to-many mapping from Hibernate, it will create the query for you if you add the collections in the POJOs. Without the collection, you have to do it manually.
Note that the collections won't take memory unless:
You use them for the first time
Or you mark them a "load eagerly" in the POJO.
The default is lazy loading, so even if the tables are huge, you won't notice.
The question you should ask is, can you model your classes such that a many-to-many relationship can be established between them without collections?
It would be ideal to use collections and then let Hibernate use lazy-loading to populate the object graph.

JPA 2 -- Using #ElementCollection in CriteriaQuery

#Entity
public class Person {
#ElementCollection
private List<Location> locations;
[...]
}
#Embeddable
public class Location {
private Integer dummy;
private Date creationDate;
[...]
}
Given the following structure, I'd like to perform the HQL or CriteriaQuery equivalent of the following SQL:
SELECT
l.*
FROM
Location l
INNER JOIN
Person p ON (p.id = l.person_id)
WHERE
p.id = ? AND l.creationDate > ?
I want to get back a list of Locations that are associated with the given person and whose creationDate is after the given one.
Thanks in advance!
Mark
Edit***: I have edited the SQL, as it was kinda misleading. I don't want to query for the locations independently.
This is not possible, you cannot query an Embeddable. From the JPA Wikibook:
Embedded Collections
An ElementCollection mapping can be
used to define a collection of
Embeddable objects. This is not a
typical usage of Embeddable objects
as the objects are not embedded in the
source object's table, but stored in a
separate collection table. This is
similar to a OneToMany, except the
target object is an Embeddable
instead of an Entity. This allows
collections of simple objects to be
easily defined, without requiring the
simple objects to define an Id or
ManyToOne inverse mapping.
ElementCollection can also override
the mappings, or table for their
collection, so you can have multiple
entities reference the same Embeddable
class, but have each store their
dependent objects in a separate table.
The limitations of using an
ElementCollection instead of a
OneToMany is that the target
objects cannot be queried,
persisted, merged independently of
their parent object. They are strictly
privately-owned (dependent) objects,
the same as an Embedded mapping.
There is no cascade option on an
ElementCollection, the target
objects are always persisted, merged,
removed with their parent.
ElementCollection still can use a
fetch type and defaults to LAZY the
same as other collection mappings.
To achieve what you want, use a OneToMany and an Entity instead of an ElementCollection and an Embeddable. Or change your approach and query the Person.
The key phrase in Pascal's reply is
the target objects cannot be queried, persisted, merged independently of their parent object
As you are dependent on the parent object, you should be able to do this using something like ...
SELECT p FROM PERSON, IN (p.locations) WHERE p.id = ?1 AND locations = ?2
(Based on the reply at Execute "MEMBER OF" query against 'ElementCollection' Map fields in JP-QL (JPA 2.0) - which is actually a Map #ElementCollection which was what I was looking for an answer to!)

JPA relationship

I have created two tables as person and address using JPA. I want to give one-to-many relationship between these tables. If I give the following
#OneToMany(mappedBy="address",targetEntity=person.class,fetch=FetchType.EAGER)
in the address table means it's not working correctly. Can any one help me?
Thanks in advance.
Without knowing anything about your architecture I will guess as to what you need.
JPA is smart enough to know how to join your tables so if you have id's in both tables you actually don't need to have "mappedBy" and "targetEntity".
You simply need to annotate your class as follows: (assuming your relationship is one address has many people).
Within the Address class:
#OneToMany
#JoinColumn(name="address_id")
public List<Person> getPeople()
{
return people;
}
This will place address_id as a field in your person table representing their associated address. Since you are declaring your list of type Person JPA will know to map to the person table (as long as the Person class is annotated properly with #Entity).
this is an example
#ElementCollection
#CollectionTable(name = "NUMBER")
private List<String> number;

Categories

Resources